geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Configuration for Java SE and Java EE JSR
Date Fri, 15 Jul 2016 07:31:03 GMT
@Anatole: think we communicated about the design choice we don't like in
tamaya and answer was "you are alone" IIRC but let's try to review some of
them now maybe

2016-07-15 2:56 GMT+02:00 Anatole Tresch <atsticks@gmail.com>:

> Hi all
>
> Folks, calm down a bit. Neverthess what I really dislike, is
>
> 1) that after so much work done, and neither Mark nor Romain being
> actively participating on the project the last months you raise your own
> initiative without involving the other people here.
> 2) That the whole Tamaya project is too bis for a JSR is clear,
> nevertheless the API part may be still small enough  (it is smaller than
> the money JSR...). This was clearly stated from the start, just remember
> this.
>

This is more vicious since the API of Tamaya hides some implementations
details like the contextuality which is not the default one and not really
"portable" enough to be a standard or the SPI is too complex to be a sane
default and accepted by most users which would better expect the config to
be a plain instance they can make managed in their own system rather than
the opposite


> 3) That you start your initiative outside of Tamaya, indirectly
> damaging/ignoring the work done so far.
>
> So, please collaborate with the guys here on the project, instead of
> running your own thing. Without joining our forces things probably will not
> be successful at all, which would be huge damage. There is much more
> politics involved that you can ever imagine, ignoring that point is simply
> naive IMO.
>
> And the scope discussion basically is something to be taken within a JSR,
> if we have one running...
>
>
Think Mark maybe mixed 2 things in his work:

- the JSR part where you are more than right
- the feature part where he is more than right IMO

To say one more word on that last part I had to implement something close
to DS api 4 times in 1 year and I can't say I was happy with that but it
was the best compromise due to current delivery of DS (topic has been
discussed and outcome was "not better before 2.x") and tamaya behavior was
not matching my expectations.  On tamaya side we also tried to make it
smaller and less oppinaited but we failed and can't fight everytime - you
have use cases and we just don't match the way we use config/write apps on
this part.

Hope it gives a bit more sense.


> Thanks, J
> Anatole
>
>
>
>
> 2016-07-15 2:07 GMT+02:00 Werner Keil <werner.keil@gmail.com>:
>
>> It really makes a "People's Front of Judea" or maybe rather say "People's
>> Front of JCP" impression here;-)
>>
>> Werner
>>
>>
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Anatole Tresch*
> PPMC Member Apache Tamaya
> JCP Star Spec Lead
> *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
> *maketechsimple.wordpress.com <http://maketechsimple.wordpress.com/> *
> *Twitter:  @atsticks, @tamayaconf*
>
>

Mime
View raw message